Canton’s plan to put tie-clip cameras on police officers seems a no-brainer. But be aware, some brains will be required — a lot of them, in fact.

The military has endured a massive move to a similar mission: live battlefield data collection from drones, satellites and manned planes. Right now, they are producing hundreds of gigabytes of surveillance in a day. They’re learning something expensive. It’s not the collecting that’s costly. It’s the behind-the-scenes human interpretation that busts the budget. Without human processing, the raw data is worthless.

For the military, simply filing that mass of information in a way that it can be quickly accessed costs millions. The Air Force, primary generator of the data flood, has gone into emergency mode to create training centers and entirely new job specialties centered on data. It’s a popular career and already in demand in the civilian work force.

DATA HANDLERS

Say the Canton Police opt for the man cams. Who is going to sort, manage, file and interpret all the data they will be collecting?

We saw this at a recent robbery of a store.

A police officer spent hours pouring over a surveillance video, searching for the perpetrators. This cries out for a technician trained in rapid examination of surveillance.

As with the dash cams in cruisers, evidence from man cams eventually will be used in court. This requires interpreters educated in evidence presentation who can make informed testimony before a judge.

While the images may be of high quality, it will be hard to frame them with your chest, and they will be moving fast.

Afterward, you don’t just throw the tapes in an evidence locker. They will need permanent and secure archiving.

When Canton began computerizing offices in the 1980s, it was a mess. The people running the machines often had manuals in their laps. It wasn’t until a professional data processing department was established that the city began benefiting from the computer revolution.

Data labs are the same kind of creature. There soon could come a day when one lab serves a number of police agencies, as do crime labs. That’s already happening with the FBI, but live man-cam surveillance requires faster action — like right now.

LAWS ARE CHANGING

On the judiciary side, we’ll need prosecutors who are in tune with the times. Data laws are changing. So-called personal-rights outfits may attempt to thwart this important step in policing. These are the same people who fought the dash cams, and look how wrong they were on that.

So bring on the man cams, but remember, they need the support of trained human eyeballs to be effective.

Page 2 of 2 -
Jim Hillibish writes about computers for The Rep and is a member of the editorial board.

WHAT THEY'RE SAYING ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGY

• “When people know they are on camera, they act like better citizens.”

Hadi Partovi, a board member for Taser International, which also makes clip-on cameras (The New York Times)

• “We don’t want the government watching the people when there is no reason, but we do support the people watching the government. There are concerns about police editing or deleting files, but overall the cost and benefits make it worthwhile.”

Jay Stanley, American Civil Liberties Union (The New York Times)

• “It has changed some of their attitude. Once they know they are being recorded, they kind of have a different view on the way they are going to talk and things like that.”

• “We believe they have paid for themselves in reducing court time for officers because of the great evidence they provide as well as greatly reducing administrative investigative time and cost when dealing with officer complaints.”

• “We have very well-trained officers. When you are acting appropriately, even if you are on videotape, it doesn’t hinder how you do your job. I think a lot of departments would look into this, but cost becomes an issue.”